Rosenblatt
Rosenblatt v. Ernst & Young International, Ltd.
Opinion
Opinion
Brewster, J.
ORDER
I. Introduction
Before the Court is Plaintiff Richard D. Rosenblatt’s (“Plaintiff’ or “Rosenblatt”) Motion For Remand Concerning the Second Amended Complaint.
II. Background
A. Procedural Background
On January 12, 1999, Plaintiff filed his initial complaint in this action in the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, North County Branch, naming as defendants three alleged residents of California: Ernst & Young, LLP (“EY-LLP”), James Pope (“Pope”), and a non-existent entity. On May 5, 1999, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) in state court naming EY-LLP, Pope, Does 1-100, and, for the first time, Ernst & Young International, Ltd. (“EYI”). The FAC set forth six causes of action: (1) intentional misrepresentation; (2) negligent misrepresentation; (3) suppression of fact; (4) constructive fraud; (5) professional negligence; and (6) declaratory relief.
On June 4, 1999, EYI timely removed this action from state court based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (a)(2). EYI removed on the basis that Rosenblatt is a citizen of California, EYI is a citizen of the Cayman Islands where it is incorporated, and that EY-LLP and Pope (California…